To ask “what is the conspiracy?”

[loulou0987]

I have seen many times on social media, over the past week, people saying there is something else going on and the Covid rules are for a different reason entirely.
I just wondered if anyone truly believes the government have a different agenda for extending lockdown??

[quote cardswapping]@AcornAutumn - Local councils already had that power www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/22 and must go to court to get authorisation from a judge.[/quote]
Thank you

Could you point me to the number? I had vertigo last week and my eyes are still a bit screwy. Thanks.

45H

There are about five other laws that gave the same principle.

Have you never read the Velveteen Rabbit?

Burning / destroying infected materials is an age old human way of limiting spread of infections.

The fact that a Public Health includes the destruction of vectors of transmission does not mean conspiracy, it simply sets parameters to what societies already. And by requesting it is done by law after a judge ruled it, it prevents mobs from torching someone's house because they have what ever virus.

The fact that a Public Health act includes the destruction of vectors of transmission does not mean conspiracy, it simply sets parameters to what societies already do. And by requesting it is done by law after a judge ruled it, it prevents mobs from torching someone's house because they have what ever virus.

Thanks, card that’s really useful

Do you happen to know about the connection between dna retained under the Coronavirus Act and terrorism? My MP sent me a link to so e info that didn’t clarify it. It just looks like a data grab.

Do you happen to know about the connection between dna retained under the Coronavirus Act and terrorism

What DNA?

A viral swab and the subsequent extraction is viral RNA.

No, sorry, I am not so hot on DNA issues, although grateful when it allows cold crimes to be solved or families to be reunited with their deceased in accidents.

Also slightly bemused people pay £££ to ancestry companies to analyse and link their DNA but find it outrageous the state might keep DNA info.

This is a helpful thread

So here’s the SI that I noticed re DNA retention

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/973/made?view=plain

Here’s what the MP sent in reply

www.gov.uk/government/news/biometrics-commissioner-statement-on-the-coronavirus-act-and-the-protection-of-freedoms-act

If anyone knows what it’s all about, that would be good to know.

There are human rights lawyers struggling to understand the law. It would help if government was willing to explain.

With the demolition power already in the Public Health Act, why the need to include it in the Coronavirus Act?

I can’t understand why anyone sends DNA to those companies.

I also can’t understand why anyone has Alexa and that kind of thing.

I don’t have a smartphone for daily life (work provide one).

Unfortunately everything we know about corona is based on information. Information is the most widely manipulated commodity in the world. Unless we can see and hear it for ourselves, the information is getting to us via some sort of channel that can be easily manipulated by those who have something to gain or lose from the truth.

I can almost guarantee that where I come from we won’t have a second wave. Whether that be the actual truth or simply what we are told to avoid the govt locking us down again to dodge an economic meltdown will be anybody’s guess.

Everything you read or hear is somebody’s version of events!

It’s all very very bizarre!

So here’s the SI that I noticed re DNA retention

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/973/made?view=plain

Here’s what the MP sent in reply

www.gov.uk/government/news/biometrics-commissioner-statement-on-the-coronavirus-act-and-the-protection-of-freedoms-act

If anyone knows what it’s all about, that would be good to know.

There's nothing in there about keeping DNA from tests.

It's about temporarily allowing the police longer time to decide whether fingerprint and DNA records already on file need to be kept for national security reasons, because covid has left them too over-stretched to process them as quickly as they used to.

NotDavidTennant “ It's about temporarily allowing the police longer time to decide whether fingerprint and DNA records already on file need to be kept for national security reasons, because covid has left them too over-stretched to process them as quickly as they used to.”

Thank you so much.

I don’t know why my MP didn’t just tell me that.

@Nomoreboobs

I think Nz and Australia are hopefully cases to show that things are heading in the right direction? If they’re not wearing masks anymore and have returned to almost normal life, even before the vaccine, surely that pours water on the control theory? Unless it’s only countries in Europe, Canada and America etc who are part of this plan? What is the connection with Trump?

Remember that respiratory viruses are seasonal. Flu and others are almost more prevalent in winter which is why we had a far better time with Covid over the summer months Australia and NZ are in their summer at present so are in a far less risky time which could be why they are able to lead more normal lives

Australia and NZ are in their summer at present so are in a far less risky time which could be why they are able to lead more normal lives

Many of us were living more normal lives in our winter also, and flu cases were very much lower than usual. As for masks, I only ever wore one on one hospital visit (and I've been hospital visiting quite a bit over the past few months) and a couple of times when I visited a rest home, which I also do frequently. That's how normal our life has been.

Invasion of Iran

Also the ideological heirs of this sort are still at it.. even if it has meant needing mass immigration to replace those they'vd bumped off

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4

Also the ideological heirs of this sort are still very much at it.. even if it has meant needing mass immigration to replace those they have bumped off

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4

@Mimishimi Sorry, can you explain further?

How have people got to 2020 and not realised that you can find any old crank spouting whatever they want on the internet? And yet people still hoover it up and thinking the rest of us are deluded fools who only need to do a little reading?

Also, as a country, we are not very similar to N Z know matter how hard you wish we were.

Or is it perhaps you who needs to research who funds SAGE, the WHO, Neil Ferguson, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the BBC and The Guardian? Do you not think it's at least slightly suspicious that all of the doctors and media outlets pushing for masks and vaccines are all on one person's payroll, whereas the doctors disagreeing with this are on a variety of different payrolls/self employed etc? Why is it that any doctor who questions masks, vaccines, social distancing and lockdowns is called a quack, when they were previously respected? Why are we all only allowed to think one thing?

@SunflowerButterfly
Fab. What is the name of this person, I would love to find out more about them? I don't have hours to read around the subject so this would be a good starting point.

Great thread - the first of its kind on here where I have seen more than one mumsnetter question what they are seeing and being told without being verbally hung, drawn and quartered. I am overjoyed to see people asking questions and looking for answers.

As usual, the condescending, patronising and sometimes vicious verbal attacks come from one side only. Phrases such as stupid, conspiracy sheep, far-right get flung around to discredit people psychologically in the minds of others. It is a very effective technique until the numbers begin to change as they are.

Nobody knows what the conspiracy is. If they did, it wouldn't be a theory anymore. When there is a dearth of accurate information, when measures don't tie up with the reality on the ground and when new emergency liberty-removing laws are rushed in a la Stalin without consent and without obvious basis in evidence, questions are bound to be asked. People on this thread who think those looking for answers to the sinister events of this year need to take a look in the mirror.

What's more, I am so glad to hear those same people will be first in line for this new experimental vaccine. Whatever your views on vaccines in general, this is a completely different situation and ALL OPINIONS on taking it are equally valid and equally based in evidence - which is thin on the ground all around. Those dismissing covid-vaccine hesitant posters as anti-science have a very narrow view of science and its commercialisation indeed, and a convenient ignorance of history and mankind. But I wouldn't attack you for it. I respect everyone's right to decide what is right for themselves and their families.

@wanderings

I've heard it's all about testing our compliance, to gauge what else "they" could make us do... This is what I think is one of the more realistic theories. I'm certain that governments leaped at this opportunity to test public compliance; and as others have said, they've now painted themselves into a corner with the Covid narrative, and can't row back on it without losing face. Those aspiring to be Oliver Cromwell and other dictators will have taken note of how easy it was to turn the public against each other, and how with a little fearmongering, the public swallowed the draconian restrictions in one gulp, without a shred of resistance: this worries me much more than the virus does.

Also, politicians like Tony Bliar have made it very hard for me to trust government ever: his government was a pioneer of the nanny state and health and safety mania, he was totally self-serving, and invaded Iraq on a massive lie: the Covid figures read like his dodgy dossier. Using the same tactic as Uncle Boris of leaking ideas to the press to test the water, his government floated the idea of "pay as you drive", and ID cards, but the public reacted badly to both of them, so they were quietly shelved (ready to be resurrected). Because of him, I am extremely distrustful of government in general, and I tend to take the view "the more the government talks about something, either it's false, or they're trying to distract us from something".

On a small point of pedantry - Blair didn't drop ID cards. We got a different government.

Blair didn't care how unpopular his ID card scheme was.

There are a lot of people (who haven't really thought about it) who still blather on about ID cards being a good idea.

You make a good point though - ID cards was a Tory policy, which Blair opposed at the time, then adopted once in government.

littledrummergirl
“ Or is it perhaps you who needs to research who funds SAGE, the WHO, Neil Ferguson, John Hopkins University, Imperial College London, the BBC and The Guardian? ”

In March, I didn’t know. Something about the lack of infection control - my dad was a hospital doctor who specialised in this- and complete insistence on behaviour control led me to think, okay, follow the money.

It’s been a revelation.

A friend of mine is getting quite obsessed with many theories at the moment.

I've tried to refer her to the BBC's fake news page but of course, she believes that the BBC are in cahoots with the UK government/bad guys so it's all propaganda. "Look at the Jimmy Saville cover up." I can't argue with that but it also doesn't prove her claims.

She will listen to me to a certain extent and I do feel like she doesn't WANT to believe the things that she's reading (she's said that she's afraid and also used the word 'consumed'). But I'm not sure what else I can do. She'll mention maybe 10 articles/instances of something she sees as corrupt to me and it'll take me a while to counter them, only for her to send more and more.

I've started listening to the conspiracy theory podcast mentioned above to better understand it all.

There are none.
It's just that far too many people are really, really, really stupid.

@AcornAutumn Out of interest, with your father being a doctor, what are his views on all this?